2018 Boundary Commission Review of Parliamentary Constituencies
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Part 1 - Open to the Public ITEM NO. 5 REPORT OF THE ELECTORAL RETURNING OFFICER. TO: ELECTORAL MATTERS COMMITTEE ON 15 MARCH 2017 TITLE: 2018 Boundary Commission Review of Parliamentary Constituencies RECOMMENDATION: Members are asked to note the current position in respect of the Boundary Commission’s ongoing review of Parliamentary constituency boundaries and to approve the submission of further representations by the City Council. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report provides Members of the Electoral Matters Committee with details of the current position in respect of the Boundary Commission’s ongoing review of Parliamentary constituency boundaries. BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: (a)Boundary Commission for England: Guide to the 2018 review of Parliamentary Constituencies (July 2016) (b)Boundary Commission: Initial Proposals 13 September 2016 (c)First stage representations www.bce2018.org.uk 1 KEY DECISION: NO DETAILS: 1.1 On 13 September, 2016, the Boundary Commission formally published their initial proposals for public consultation. 1.2 In respect of Greater Manchester, Wirral and Cheshire Sub-region, the initial proposals document indicates:- “The reduction of 2 from the current 27 constituencies to 25 would result in significant change in the metropolitan county, and we considered that most of the change would have to take place in the east of the county where a greater proportion of existing constituencies had electorates that were small.” “In Greater Manchester, 11 constituencies are currently within the electoral range and, being mindful of local ties, we tried to retain as many of the existing constituencies with as little change as possible.” “The constituencies of Wigan, Makerfield, Leigh, Worsley and Eccles South, Salford and Eccles, Blackley and Broughton, Manchester Gorton, Manchester Withington and Wythenshawe and sale East are therefore completely unchanged in our proposals.” 1.3 The North West has been allocated 68 constituencies. A reduction of 7 from 75. 1.4 14 of the North West’s constituencies remain unchanged. 1.5 The proposed split of constituencies across the sub-regions in the North West is as follows:- Sub-Region Existing Allocation Proposed Allocation Cumbria 6 5 Lancashire 16 14 Merseyside 11 10 Greater Manchester, the 42 39 Wirral and Cheshire 1.6 The initial proposals have been subject to a 12 week consultation period. 1.7 Written and oral representations were requested from interested parties on the initial proposals and public hearings were held to receive oral representations. (representations made in respect of the 3 Salford constituencies attached as an Appendix A) 1.8 There is now a 4 week consultation period on the initial representations. This consultation period ends on 27 March 2017. 2 1.9 The BCE will then produce a written report considering the representations received and recommending whether the initial proposals should be revised. If the initial proposals are to be revised, then a further 8 week consultation period is held for further written representations to be made. The BCE expect this final consultation period (if required) to be held at the end of 2017/early 2018. 1.10 Following the receipt of any further written representations, the BCE will then decide on its final recommendations and publish these in a final report to Government. The final report marks the end of the review. 1.11 The procedure to implement the new constituencies will then be the responsibility of Government and Parliament. 1.12 Also attached at Appendix B is the City Council’s response of 17 November 2016 to the BCE’s initial proposals. KEY COUNCIL POLICIES: N/A EQUALITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND IMPLICATIONS: N/A ASSESSMENT OF RISK: Low LEGAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Supplied by: N/A OTHER DIRECTORATES CONSULTED: N/A CONTACT OFFICER: Neil Watts TEL NO: 0161 793 3446 WARDS TO WHICH REPORT RELATES: All 3 APPENDIX A Boundary Commission Review of Parliamentary Constituencies (2018): Representations made at the recent public hearings (A)Blackley & Broughton Constituency 2. CLLR MERRY: I am John Merry, I am representing Salford City Council. We have a mayoral system in Salford and I am the deputy mayor of Salford and I am here at the request of the mayor to make representations about the nature of the constituencies surrounding Salford. We are in support of the Boundary Commission proposals and opposed to alternatives that have been suggested to us. Last time you took two wards from Salford – I represent one of those particular wards – and combined them with some Manchester wards to form the Blackley and Broughton constituency. Obviously, after some initial misgivings, we have settled down and worked very effectively together and worked very effectively with the local MP. We are in a situation now where Salford is the fastest growing area over the next five to ten years in the Greater Manchester area and I think it is likely that in future Boundary Commission reviews you will want to return to this particular subject when the full effects of that growth is actually known. At the moment we feel your particular recommendation takes account of the situation in Salford. I recognise you have a different set of criteria from the ones which you have employed previously and I do understand the overriding need to ensure that the numbers in each constituency are within the small tolerances prescribed for you and, of course, your proposals did actually meet that particular need. An alternative proposal I have seen suggested is that you move the boundary so that Irwell Riverside is incorporated with some of the Manchester wards and Broughton and Kersal. Whilst I recognise that the most important thing for you is to maintain numbers, it seems to me that you have also got a secondary responsibility that if you can do it within the numbers to take account of regional reasonable boundaries, and, of course, although the other side is on the other side of the Irwell, it has not got a great deal in common with Blackley ward, for example, as has been proposed in one particular proposal and we would be very concerned about it. In particular, the ward of Irwell Riverside comprises much of the traditional heart of Salford. It comprises the cathedral, the old administrative centre and Chapel Street, and we think it fits more naturally with the constituency that you propose, which is basically the Salford and Eccles one and maintaining the Salford and Eccles boundary. I am here, which is rather unusual for me, when I have attended a number of these, to express support for the Boundary Commission proposals. I recognise you have got a difficult job to do. I think within the confines of that 4 you have done a very reasonable effort in terms of Greater Manchester and we believe your particular proposals should be supported. 2. MR STRINGER (Member of Parliament for Blackley and Broughton): Graham Stringer, Member of Parliament for Blackley and Broughton and I live at 25 Park Road, Crumpsall M8 4HT. I will not detain the Commission very long. I have got two very simple points to make in support of the Boundary Commission’s proposals for Manchester and Salford and as opposed to the proposals that have been put in by the Conservative Party. The first point is that it appears that Manchester is being disrupted to its disbenefit and for the benefit of Bury and Bolton. I think there are two consequences of that, which are the main two points I want to make. When I appeared before the Boundary Commission when the current boundaries were set up, one of the defining characteristics of that discussion was the natural boundary over the River Irwell which forms the boundary of the Blackley and Broughton constituency. It is a natural boundary which, although is not ideal having a constituency in two cities –apart from the Member of Parliament who represents the City of Westminster, I think I am the only MP who represents two constituencies – the communities of Broughton and Cheetham and Kersal merge into each other. They have a long history of Jewish and, more recently, immigration from, primarily, Pakistan but increasingly from the Indian subcontinent. A great deal of work is done to support the communities getting on together. Actually, although the city boundary would have been a good boundary, the River Irwell is a more natural boundary and it fits with those communities. I would defy anybody who did not know where the boundary was to guess where the boundary between Cheetham and Broughton was. That constituency works. Conversely, because the River Irwell is a large natural boundary, if one goes across it to Riverside ward or some of the other wards that are currently in the Salford constituency, there is very little connection or community similarity between those wards and the wards of North Manchester and, indeed, of Broughton and Kersal. That natural boundary, the natural community links that are there that would not be there in the proposed new constituency of Salford and Blackley is, I think, the first reason I would support the Boundary Commission’s proposal . 3. Martin Connolly, Blackley and Broughton Constituency Labour Party. We support your proposals for Greater Manchester which leaves the constituencies of Wigan, Makerfield, Leigh, Worsley and Eccles South, Salford and Eccles, Manchester Gorton, Manchester Withington, Wythenshawe and Sale East and our own constituency of Blackley and Broughton, completely unchanged. 5 We are concerned to learn of the Conservative Party’s proposals for Greater Manchester which would lead to the creation of a Salford and Blackley constituency comprised of 2 Manchester wards, Crumpsall and Higher Blackley, 2 Salford wards, Broughton and Kersal, separated by the River Irwell from the Salford wards of Eccles, Irwell Riverside, Langworthy, Ordsall and Weaste and Seedley.